delete_folder

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. While it indicates a destructive action ('delete') and recursive scope, it fails to mention irreversibility, permission requirements, or error states (e.g., folder not found, non-empty). This is minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, unduttered sentence of four words. There is no wasted text, and the critical verb and noun are front-loaded. For a simple tool with one parameter, this is optimally concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one required parameter), the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits important context such as error handling, side effects, or the implication that deletion is irreversible. The existance of an output schema partly mitigates the need to describe return values, but behavioral gaps remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema provides 100% coverage with a clear description ('Path of the folder to delete.'). The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter – it only describe the operation. Following guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema already covers all parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('delete') and the resource ('folder'), and the term 'Recursively' clarifies the scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_file (which targets files) and create_folder (opposite action). It is specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., delete_file for folders vs files) or any prerequisites or conditions. There is no mention of when-not-to-use or potential consequences, leaving the agent without decision support.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.